The message: good communication of results (and caveats), and how to avoid Cochrane’s most common major errors

Article type
Authors
Trivella M1, Cumpston M2, Lasserson T2, Marshall R3, Ni Ogain O3
1Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Oxford University
2Cochrane Editorial Unit
3Cochrane Editorial Unit, UK
Abstract
Objectives:
To provide participants with practical guidance on using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) to ensure good practice, consistent communication of findings and the quality of evidence in Cochrane Reviews.

Description:
Through small group exercises, to focus on using GRADE to structure communication of the findings of Cochrane Reviews.

The Cochrane Editorial Unit currently screens all Cochrane Reviews before publication. The most common serious errors relate to the consistent reporting of results across the review (including the Discussion, Conclusions, Abstract and Plain language summary), and making use of GRADE considerations such as risk of bias, consistency and precision to contextualise findings. Interpreting statistically non-significant results is a particular challenge.

In this workshop:
- participants will be given completed 'Summary of findings' tables, including numerical results and appraisals of the quality of the evidence, and will draft an appropriate Abstract.
- discussion and comparison of the produced abstracts will follow, highlighting any arising issues, especially regarding the MECIR (Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews) standards for reporting the results of Cochrane Reviews.
- finally, participants will be asked to provide a couple of key sentences of guidance for their fellow authors and/or editors on how to avoid the pitfalls identified in the earlier exercise.